Normal 0 false false false EN-US X-NONE X-NONE MicrosoftInternetExplorer4
As some of you may know, I am doing a report on the ABCT and will be including substantial information to previous United States’ booms and busts. In addition from Rothbard’s work on the subject (in A history of money and banking) I have fortunately found Historian Scott Trask and his information on the Panics of 1837 and 57 (links are below). First of all, does anyone have any information on this man? I haven’t found any books that he wrote or any activities that he has done. Secondly, and more importantly while reading both of his articles I have found two sets of data for the same period that conflict substantially. Shown below are his tables he used to describe the period of 1833 to 1837 in two different articles.
http://mises.org/pdf/asc/2002/asc8-trask.pdf
Banking and Money Statistics three years previous to the Panic of 1837
1833 (Dec.) 1837 (Jan.) Increase
Number of Banks 506 788 56%
Bank Loans $379m. $582m. 53%
Bank Notes $115m. $160m. 39%
Bank Deposits $87m. $129m. 48%
Bank Specie $36m. $41m. 14%
Reserve Ratio 18% 14% -22%
Specie in Circulation $41m. $73m. 78%
Total Money Supply $243m. $362m. 49%
Inflation $166 $248 49%
Population 14m. 15.7m 12%
Money per capita $17.36 $23 32%
Inflation per capita $11.86 $15.80 34%
Commodity Prices 75.3 90.4 20%
20 Dewey, Financial History, 260; A. Barton Hepburn, A History of Currency in the United States (New York, 1903;
repr. New York: Augustus M. Kelley, 1967), 159-160, 177-178.
http://www.mises.org/journals/scholar/trask1.pdf
Table III: The 1830s Inflation under the State-Bank Depository System
Bank Loans $324m. $525m. 62%
Bank Notes $95m. $149m. 57%
Bank Deposits $76m. $127m. 67%
Bank Specie $26m. $38m. 46%
Reserve Ratio 15.2% 13.7% -9%
Specie in country (total) $41m. $73m. 78%
Total Money Supply $186m. $311m. 67%
Inflation $145 $238 64%
Money per capita $13.21 $19.80 50%
Inflation per capita $10.35 $15.15 46%
5 All statistics are taken from A. Barton Hepburn, A History of Currency in the United States (New York, 1903; repr.
NY: Augustus M. Kelley, 1967), 127-141; 159-160; and Davis R. Dewey, Financial History of the United States
(New York, 1902).
Now in his footnotes he lists the sources, and they are both the same for each. But some of the numbers are completely different for the same period of time! The dates on the articles are pretty much the same, with both articles published in 2002. Does anyone know the deal with this? His articles on 37 and especially 57 seem a treasure trove for me, except for the fact that I don’t know which set of data to use!?! Am I missing something here or is something wrong with his publications?
And I guess to add insult to injury, in one of the articles on the Mises website he states this.
http://mises.org/story/1363
From 1833 to 1837, the nation's money supply (specie plus bank notes and deposits) increased by 78 percent, or nearly 20 percent annually.
In either sets of this data the money supply did not increase by 78 percent, only the specie did.
Seems like two great sources on the subject, but I don’t know which to use, nor can my conscience use a source which conflicts with another source of the same author. If anyone can help me out on this I would greatly appreciate it.
try the sources maybe?
http://www.archive.org/details/historyofcurrenc014394mbphttp://www.archive.org/details/financialhistory033129mbp
Where there is no property there is no justice; a proposition as certain as any demonstration in Euclid
Fools! not to see that what they madly desire would be a calamity to them as no hands but their own could bring
Thanks for the links. Alas, I could not find anything, and I would appreciate anyone taking a quick look as wel. Seems to be a big difference in statistics, and I don't want to use a faulty source. I sent him an email, and hopefully he will get back to me. (I sent an email to Thomas Woods earlier and he never got back to me :( ).
You may have emailed at a time when (as now) I was flooded with email and I could not reply to it all without taking undue time away from the family. I don't know how to answer your question in any case, apart from referring you Scott himself.
Hi, Mr Woods. I hope I didn't write my last post in this thread in a snobby manner, I completely understand you not being able to take all the time in the world replying to emails because of your family. My email to you wasn't about this particular thread but about another thread I had with a research project. Being flooded with emails is probably a good thing . Sorry about somewhat of a rude awakening on my part.
TomWoods: You may have emailed at a time when (as now) I was flooded with email and I could not reply to it all without taking undue time away from the family. I don't know how to answer your question in any case, apart from referring you Scott himself.
This is outrageous Mr. Woods. As a public intellectual, this means you are publicly owned. Obama doesn't approve of this private ownership of your time either by yourself or your family. Why are you so greedy? Don't you believe in democracy?
Anyway, I would like to offer my services dividing up your time equally among all of the citizens of the world.
Feel free to email me, [email protected]